Tag Archives: democrat
Obama: I might lose congressional vote on Syria
Obama: I might lose congressional vote on Syria (AP) / 10 September 2013 President Barack Obama conceded Monday night he might lose his fight for congressional support of a military strike against Syria, and declined to say what he would do if lawmakers reject his call to back retaliation for a chemical weapons attack last month. The president sought to use a glimmer of a possible diplomatic solution — including vaguely encouraging statements by Russian and Syrian officials on Monday — as fresh reason for Congress to back his plan. Syria welcomed a proposal to turn over all of its chemical weapons to international control. Obama said Syria’s statement was a potentially positive development, but he voiced skepticism about that the regime of President Bashar Al Assad would follow through. He said it was yet another reason for lawmakers to give him the backing he is seeking. He spoke in a series of six television network interviews planned as part of a furious lobbying campaign aimed at winning support from dubious lawmakers and well as a war-weary public. Speaking of Assad’s government, Obama said the credible threat of a military strike led by the United States “has given them pause and makes them consider whether or not they could make this move” to surrender control of their chemical weapons stockpile. “If we don’t maintain and move forward with a credible threat of military pressure, I do not think we will actually get the kind of agreement I would like to see,” Obama said on CNN. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cited “international discussions” in unexpectedly postponing a test vote originally set for Wednesday on Obama’s call for legislation backing a military strike. In a separate interview with NBC, Obama took the step — unusual for any politician — of conceding he may lose his campaign in Congress for authorization. “I wouldn’t say I’m confident” of the outcome, he said. “I think it’s fair to say that I haven’t decided” on a next step if Congress turns its back, the president told NBC. Obama arranged a trip to Congress on Tuesday as well as a prime time speech from the White House. The president picked up a smattering of support but also suffered a reversal when Sen. Johnny Isakson, a Republican, announced he had switched from a backer of military action to an opponent. Reid, the Senate majority leader, made a statement of support for the president’s request. “Today, many Americans say that these atrocities are none of our business, that they’re not our concern,” the Democrat said of Assad’s alleged gassing of civilians on Aug. 21. “I disagree. Any time the powerful turn such weapons of terror and destruction against the powerless, it is our business.” Others came down on the other side of the question. “I will vote ‘no’ because of too much uncertainly about what comes next,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Republican, reflecting concerns that even the limited action Obama was contemplating could lead to a wider war. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat, also voiced opposition. “I strongly believe that we need the entire world, not just America, to prevent and deter the use of chemical weapons in Syria, or anywhere else on the globe,” she said. In the House of Representatives, one of two female Iraq war veterans in Congress announced opposition to military strikes. Legislation approved in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week would give Obama a maximum of 90 days to carry out a military attack, and it includes a ban on combat operations on the ground in Syria. Both of those limitations were last-minute concessions to critics of a military option, and it was unclear whether Reid would seek additional changes to build support. Despite the difficulty confronting Obama, an AP survey indicated the issue was hardly hopeless for the president, particularly in the Senate where Democrats maintain a majority, and perhaps also in the Republican-controlled House. The survey showed 23 Senate votes in favour of military authorization and 10 more leaning that way. Opponents totalled 20, with another 14 leaning in the same direction, with the remaining 33 senators undecided or publicly uncommitted. That created at least the possibility of the 60-vote majority that will be necessary to advance the bill. In the House, there were fewer than a dozen declared in support and 150 opposed or leaning that way. But 201 lawmakers had yet to take a public position, more than enough to swing the outcome either way. The public opinion polling was daunting for the president and his team. An Associated Press poll showed that 61 percent of those surveyed want Congress to vote against authorization of U.S. military strikes in Syria and 26 percent want lawmakers to support such an action, with the remainder undecided. Continue reading
As Agriculture Booms, Farm Bill Gets Yawns
Legislation Fails to Engage at Grass-Roots Level as Farmers Reap Big Profits MARK PETERS and COREY BOLES For decades, the farm bill has served as the main vehicle for U.S. agriculture policy, getting renewed about every five years to keep billions of dollars flowing to farm subsidies and rural development programs. But lobbyists and lawmakers say the measure is drawing less grass-roots support from the Farm Belt this time around as the House struggles to pass the measure for a second straight year. Philip Scott Andrews for The Wall Street Journal Rep. Marlin Stutzman on his farm outside Howe, Ind. He is pushing to separate the nutrition programs from the agricultural part of the farm bill. [/url] “I think there are a number of farmers asking what do we need a farm bill for,” said Mr. Wolheter, whose office is adorned with dozens of hats from tractor and seed companies. “The federal debt is the real concern.” In certain slices of agriculture, the bill is attracting strong interest. Growers of vegetables, cotton, peanut and rice have pushed for an expansion of federal subsidies for crop insurance. In the dairy sector, a fight has erupted between dairy farmers and dairy-product producers over government price supports. The safety net for farmers is changing from automatic payments to farmers regardless of their economic circumstances, to crop insurance and other programs. Both the House and Senate support eliminating $5 billion a year in the direct payments to farmers, and would expand federal subsidies toward the cost of crop insurance. And so farmers in this corner of Indiana are questioning the composition of the bill like never before. “There is more concern about what they’re doing in other areas than the agricultural end of it,” said Stanley Sickafoose, who farms 6,500 acres of corn and soybeans. U.S. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, who represents the region and farms 4,000 acres with his father and brothers, voted against the farm bill and found support from farmers as he returned home for the Fourth of July break. The Indiana Republican is pushing in Congress to split off the nutrition programs from the core farm bill. Splitting the legislation in the House would complicate negotiations over a final bill in the Senate, where the Democratic leadership in control of the chamber is staunchly opposed to a breakup. Rep. Collin Peterson, who represents a district in rural Minnesota and is the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, has warned that if the farm bill is split, no House Democrats would vote for it, and it would die in negotiations with the Senate anyway. He says he fears that without a farm bill, growers would become more exposed to a sustained decline in prices. Farmers “are very quick to forget the bad times,” Mr. Peterson said. “Right now they’re not too worried about this.” Write to Mark Peters at mark.peters@dowjones.com and Corey Boles at corey.boles@dowjones.com A version of this article appeared July 10, 2013, on page A6 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: As Agriculture Booms, Farm Bill Gets Yawns. Continue reading
Carbon Market Slump Worries Policy Makers
Jul 10, 2013 From wire reports CLEAR SKIES: Emissions prices in the $72 billion cap-and-trade program have fallen more than 70 percent in the past 4 years. VILNIUS – The European Parliament approved a plan intended to reduce a record glut of permits and increase prices in the world’s biggest carbon market after they slumped to an all-time low, reports Bloomberg. European Union carbon allowances rose the most in two months after lawmakers in Strasbourg, France, endorsed a revised version of a plan known as backloading advanced by the European Commission, the region’s regulatory arm. That was the Parliament’s second verdict on the measure, which would delay the sale of some permits to support prices after it blocked the plan in April, triggering a 45 percent slump. “It’s a good signal that Parliament voted this through today,” Oeystein Loeseth, chief executive officer of Vattenfall, Europe’s biggest emitter after RWE, said by telephone. “When you take volumes out of the market, prices will increase.” Emissions prices in the $72 billion cap-and-trade program have lost more than 70 percent in the past four years. The euro area’s record-long recession reduced demand for pollution rights and worsened a glut that swelled to about 2 billion metric tons in 2012, according to the EU. That’s almost equal to the region’s annual limit imposed on 12,000 power plants and factories. The caps were set before the financial crisis. EU allowances for delivery in December gained 9.3 percent, the biggest jump since May 3, to close at 4.69 euros a ton on the ICE Futures Europe exchange, after falling on July 3 by as much as 24 percent before the vote. The contract slumped to a record 2.46 euros on April 17, the day after the Parliament blocked the emergency fix in its first plenary vote. Lawmakers endorsed the plan 344 to 311, with 46 abstentions, according to the voting result. “The backloading plan has passed its largest hurdle so far, but auction curbs are still far from certain and unlikely to start before mid-2014,” Itamar Orlandi, an analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance in London, said on July 3 by e-mail. “The focus will now shift from Strasbourg to Berlin, as Germany’s decision on the plan will determine whether it can go ahead.” Traders will now focus on positions of national governments, whose consent is also needed to enact the plan, according to Ingo Ramming, co-head of commodity solutions at Commerzbank in London. “Markets are hoping on a fast-track decision to regain confidence in the EU emissions trading scheme,” he said July 3 by e-mail. “We would expect that prices are capped in the mid-term around 6 euros on the back of uncertainties on the European economy, supply from industrials and auctioning.” Permits may rise to 5.20 euros after the approval, according to the median forecast of nine analysts and traders surveyed by Bloomberg News before the vote. The assembly rejected amendments seeking an earlier return of the delayed permits to the market and earmarking 600 million allowances for a special fund to promote low-emissions technology. It backed a proposal to cap backloading at 900 million permits and limit the planned intervention in the carbon market to an exceptional, one-time move. The delay in sales of permits may be enacted under the condition that it has “no significant impact” on companies prone to relocating production to regions without emission curbs, lawmakers decided. “This is more bullish than the market had anticipated,” Konrad Hanschmidt, an analyst at BNEF, said on July 3 by e-mail. The backloading strategy has divided policy makers and industry. Opponents of the fix, ranging from Poland to steelmaker ArcelorMittal, say it pushes up energy costs during an economic slump. The EU commission and companies including Royal Dutch Shell say intervention is needed to bolster prices that are too low to stimulate investment in clean technology. “Yes!” EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said on her Twitter Inc. account. “Despite heavy-handed lobbying, and after very substantial debate, the European Parliament supports the backloading proposal.” The decision in favor of backloading on July 3 authorizes Matthias Groote, the lawmaker overseeing the measure in the Parliament, to start talks with representatives of national governments on the final wording of the legislation in a fast-track procedure. The outcome of the talks will need official approval by the Parliament and EU ministers. Lithuania, which holds the EU rotating presidency and will represent member states in the negotiations, is ready for a “constructive dialog” on the carbon fix, the Baltic country’s Environment Minister Valentinas Mazuronis said in an e-mailed statement. He said he was confident the measure can be dealt with “effectively and expeditiously.” The Parliament’s decision to block the faster return of permits to the market and the creation of the innovation fund will make talks with member states easier, Peter Liese, a German Christian Democrat member of the Parliament, said after the vote. “It’ll go very fast after the German elections,” he said in an interview. Member states may decide about their position by “early fall,” according to Arunas Vinciunas, Lithuania’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the EU. While most EU countries favor backloading, they are short of the qualified majority needed to approve the proposal because several nations, including Germany, remain undecided. Chancellor Angela Merkel said in May she hoped that Europe’s biggest economy would be able to tackle the plan soon after elections on Sept. 22. “It is crucial to get structural reforms quickly off the ground to ensure the emissions trading system will be sustainable and predictable,” Bernhard Guenther, chief financial officer of RWE, said on July 3 in an interview. “We need to know what the political framework for investments in 2020 and ahead will look like and which climate and reduction targets have to be achieved.” Continue reading
